re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

quote:

---

But Paragraph 4 specifically states ".. in which nuclear weapons are used"

---

You may actually be correct on that. There’s an “or” in that sentence but after re-reading it I’m not certain whether the “nuclear weapons” piece applies to one half or the whole thing. I don’t think it really matters as much as the next point though:

quote:

---

For the remainder of your comments, are apparently verbal only comments and understanding binding? This could lead to differing interpretations of what was said and what it meant... especially as administrations change.

---

Define “binding.” Very few treaties have any real teeth. Ukraine already gave up their nukes so what recourse do they have if the US tells them to kick rocks? Hell, Russia has objectively violated the text of the treaty since 2014 - did they give the nukes back?

That’s the thing about geopolitics. Your ability to negotiate these treaties effectively boils down to A) your leverage and B) the value of your word. The leverage part comes and goes. Sometimes you have the other party by the balls and the rest doesn’t matter.

The value of your word is different. Yes, it’s subject to interpretation across different administrations. That’s kind of a key point - dramatic swings in foreign policy between presidents can and do hurt our standing on the world stage because other countries begin to see us as unpredictable. On the other hand, it can be a strength when US negotiators can point to consistency across multiple administrations from different political parties.

quote:

---

You rightfully mention the implications going forward but i wonder about the implications of our various sanctions, esp if imposed on other countries and entities further removed from Russia. Who would trust us or the US dollar?

---

This is a much more complex issue but I’ll say this: yes, we do need to be concerned with how our economic actions (read: sanctions) affect global trust in the US dollar.

This is where having a global coalition, rather than taking unilateral action, becomes quite important. Let’s use the current scenario as an example. Russia would make the argument that America’s actions (specifically restriction of Russia’s access to their USD reserves) indicate that the USD is not a trustworthy reserve currency. But if that’s the case, what reserve currency is trustworthy? Certainly not the Ruble, which has taken a huge hit because of global sanctions. Not the Yuan, which has been heavily manipulated for decades based on Chinese interests. What about other first world currencies? The Euro? The Pound? Those governments are in line with the US in sanctioning Russia.

The risk of impact to the USD would be much more concerning if we were acting unilaterally. But we aren’t.